Can McCain win over conservatives?

[RecycleMichael]

I am amazed (and a little amused) at how many conservatives are having trouble with the probable republican nominee for president. I think Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are going to have big explosions in their little brains.

Even local big brain Michael Bates is upset. He is trying to convince Oklahomans to vote for Huckabee, not because he is his choice, but because he is closest to McCain in state polling. He has writtem three columns on how to stop McCain.  http://www.batesline.com/

They all clearly don't want McCain.

I think it is sad to convince someone to vote a certain way, not because of a single stance that they have taken, but because where they stand in the polls in a given state.

Will it matter? Probably not. McCain will be the republican nominee. They will all forget their words this winter and endorse McCain over either Hillary or Obama. They all always do.

Democrats fall in love with their candidate, republicans fall in line with their candidate.

[altruismsuffers]

Here is an idea, why don't "conservatives" actually vote for some who is CONSERVATIVE!!??

Like someone who:
-Never voted to Raise Taxes
-Never voted for an Unbalanced budget
-Never voted to raise congressional pay
-Never taken a government-paid junket
-Never voted to increase the power of the executive branch
-Voted against regulating the internet
-Does not participate in lucrative congressional pension program
-And has REPEATEDLY been name the "Taxpayers Best Friend"

 Who is this Mystery Candidate?  
It is Dr. Ron Paul!  You may not of heard of him if you just watch the tube but he just placed 3rd in Maine just barely below the "Front Runner" McCain.

[Conan71]

RM, think a little more about it:

People in both parties do the same thing you are speaking of.  

People who loved Hillary and didn't like Obama (I've not heard one person say they "hate" him) will fall in line if he wins the nomination.  There already are Democrats starting to line up behind Obama and shift their support because they are worried about McCain getting the nomination.  As much as Hillary is villified by the GOP and about half of her own party, it could be a landslide for McCain.  

The smart strategy is to get Obama nominated because he's fresh enough in Washington and he's been outspoken against Iraq and the status quo.  He's young, idealistic, good looking, and thanks to a special endorsement from the family: "The next Jack Kennedy."  Get the message out, register a ton of young voters, and just like that he could be president.

All that said, Super Tuesday hasn't happened yet, the polls have proven to be wrong several times thus far  in the election season.  Romney isn't out of the running till all the votes are tallied.

I think with the winner take all system, it will be better for the GOP to be unified well before the convention.  With Hillary and Obama so close, there might be an all-out cat-fight which splits your party irretrevably prior to the general election.

One thing is for certain is there will not be a Bush in the White House this time around.  I also have a pretty good gut instinct there won't be a Clinton either.  We've had 20 years of those two families.  Time for someone else to give it a go.

Michael Bates along with the radio commentators have their core values and stick to them.  Do you like it when others lampoon your core values?

[rwarn17588]

I'm with RM on this one.

This whole "tactical" voting stuff smacks of dishonesty. Don't vote for someone you detest. If you don't like any of the candidates in your party, stay home.

Bates has shown a lot of love for Fred Thompson. Last I checked, he's still on the ballot for Tuesday's primary. If Bates truly wants to force a brokered GOP convention this summer (which is unlikely), he should vote for someone he feels enthusiastic about, like Thompson, to take away that vote from McCain.

And Bates' strategy to vote for Huckabee may backfire. Romney is rising fast in the Oklahoma Poll numbers, while Huckabee is dropping. He probably should have advocated a vote for Romney instead. Romney may have a better chance of knocking off McCain at this point, but it's not certain. Such are the risks of using your vote in such a dubious way.

And I doubt there will be that much acrimony between the Obama and Clinton camps. There is little difference in their platforms. And remember, Hillary was the wife of a popular president. Her supposed unpopularity comes from people who wouldn't vote for her anyway.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by altruismsuffers

Here is an idea, why don't "conservatives" actually vote for some who is CONSERVATIVE!!??

Like someone who:
-Never voted to Raise Taxes
-Never voted for an Unbalanced budget
-Never voted to raise congressional pay
-Never taken a government-paid junket
-Never voted to increase the power of the executive branch
-Voted against regulating the internet
-Does not participate in lucrative congressional pension program
-And has REPEATEDLY been name the "Taxpayers Best Friend"

 Who is this Mystery Candidate?  
It is Dr. Ron Paul!  You may not of heard of him if you just watch the tube but he just placed 3rd in Maine just barely below the "Front Runner" McCain.

Were you one of the Ron Paul sheeple who send a fake press release from "oklahomans for huckabee," misdirecting people to the wrong location for his visit?

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588


And I doubt there will be that much acrimony between the Obama and Clinton camps. There is little difference in their platforms. And remember, Hillary was the wife of a popular president. Her supposed unpopularity comes from people who wouldn't vote for her anyway.

And this is worth repeating, too.  The competition between Hillary and Obama has been strong but not fractious.  Democrats are very motivated this cycle, and by and large are ready to back whoever gets the nom.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588


And I doubt there will be that much acrimony between the Obama and Clinton camps. There is little difference in their platforms. And remember, Hillary was the wife of a popular president. Her supposed unpopularity comes from people who wouldn't vote for her anyway.

Huh?  Been reading the newspapers or listening to the news the last few weeks?  You really think there hasn't been acrimony a-plenty with Kennedy's endorsement of Obama amongst many other things?

You guys need to keep in mind, Michael Bates, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity are but three Republicans.  They don't necessarily speak for an entire party, though that's an easy image to get.  They pontificate their views to people via mass media, but that doesn't mean everyone who listens is in lock-step.

The worst thing someone can do is sit out the political process.  Every vote is important.  It's important every elligible voter participates in our political process.  The problem is, many look for absolutes in who we want for our leaders.  We need to be open-minded and find the one who is closest to represeting our values, not one who absolutely represents our values.

Single issue and party-line voters do annoy me but that is their right instead of staying home on election day.

Truth of the matter is, I dislike Hillary so much I'd never vote for her, I don't trust her intentions and I think she is going to waste valuable time trying to get her un-workable Hillary-care enacted.  McCain is liberal enough, if he runs against Obama, I'll take a closer look at Obama and see which one is better suited to work in a bi-partisan fashion with Congress to make things happen.

No matter who winds up in office, they are going to face Iraq, and I'm certain no one candidate is going to be able to end that conflict any sooner than another, regardless of the current rhetoric.

[cannon_fodder]

The "purest" Republican talking heads sure are up in arms about McCain. I'm not sure if it is because they don't like him or because they want Mitt to win (keep in mind some have called for Huckabee to drop out, which would certainly bennefit Romney above others).  I don't recall this level of angst the last time he ran.

In any event, I have problems with McCain's fiscal and economic agenda/record and the fact that he has worked for the government his entire life.  But I see some positives too (knows the system, socially more liberal, strong defense, works with the other party).

I still stand by the notion that Hillary is nearly unelectable with a 50% negative voter opinion.  But the polls indicate she has a good shot over any Republican but McCain (they didn't have Paul on the survey).  Obama wins over everyone (though it is a statistical tie with McCain really).  Obama/McCain would be a presidential race that I could see positives on both sides - that seems rare lately in politics.

[altruismsuffers]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by altruismsuffers

Here is an idea, why don't "conservatives" actually vote for some who is CONSERVATIVE!!??

Like someone who:
-Never voted to Raise Taxes
-Never voted for an Unbalanced budget
-Never voted to raise congressional pay
-Never taken a government-paid junket
-Never voted to increase the power of the executive branch
-Voted against regulating the internet
-Does not participate in lucrative congressional pension program
-And has REPEATEDLY been name the "Taxpayers Best Friend"

 Who is this Mystery Candidate?  
It is Dr. Ron Paul!  You may not of heard of him if you just watch the tube but he just placed 3rd in Maine just barely below the "Front Runner" McCain.

Were you one of the Ron Paul sheeple who send a fake press release from "oklahomans for huckabee," misdirecting people to the wrong location for his visit?

I don't know what you are talking about.

[Conan71]

Or one of the vandals spray painting "Ron Paul" on traffic light signal boxes around town?

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by altruismsuffers


I don't know what you are talking about.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080201_1__Arepr48631

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

I'm with RM on this one.

This whole "tactical" voting stuff smacks of dishonesty. Don't vote for someone you detest. If you don't like any of the candidates in your party, stay home.

Bates has shown a lot of love for Fred Thompson. Last I checked, he's still on the ballot for Tuesday's primary. If Bates truly wants to force a brokered GOP convention this summer (which is unlikely), he should vote for someone he feels enthusiastic about, like Thompson, to take away that vote from McCain.

If the 13% or so who supported Thompson before he dropped out were to vote for him on Tuesday, it would just make it easier for McCain to finish first with an even lower percentage of the vote.

Remember the six-candidate special election in Council District 5 in 2005? The winner had only 29% of the vote because the other 71% was split between five candidates. Would Martinson have won a head-to-head competition with Harer or Phillips? We'll never know.

Let's do some math. Assume 35% of Republican voters prefer John McCain and 65% can't stand him. If that 65% is spread evenly between two or more candidates -- McCain finishes first in Oklahoma and wins all the delegates, even though the vast majority of Oklahoma voters don't like him.

That's why it's important for anyone who wants to stop McCain's momentum to get behind one candidate or another. There is a danger that the poll numbers are wrong, but that's the only thing we have to go by, and in Oklahoma every poll I've seen puts Huckabee in second place here.

Tactical voting is a rational response to a broken voting system -- plurality winner-take-all. Under our current, broken system, an intelligent voter will consider how his vote will combine with the votes of others to produce a result. He will think about what the likely outcomes are, based on the best information he has available, and vote in a way that helps bring about the likely outcome that he prefers.

A rational system like instant runoff voting would allow a voter simply to think about his own preferences, confident that his vote will help candidates he likes without accidentally aiding candidates he doesn't like.

[Conan71]

Here's the point:

The national DNC has a responsibility to get a winable candidate nomintated as does the RNC.  You are going to see shifting loyalties along the way.  The idea is to get the office.  So what if there are strange bed-fellows, this is politics, that's what happens in politics.

Yes I do see some flawed logic in voting for candidate C to keep votes from candidate A, so that perhaps candidate B will win.

That's pretty much how "candidate B" won the 1992 presidential race.

From where I sit, Huckabee doesn't stand a chance at winning the nomination, but it's his prerogative as to when he decides to drop out.

I believe more and more rank-and-file Republicans are realizing McCain is the best chance to fend off Obama.  Romney or Huckabee could beat Hillary due to pre-existing distaste for the madam.  Not quite the certainty against Obama.

[rwarn17588]

<Conan wrote:

Romney or Huckabee could beat Hillary due to pre-existing distaste for the madam. Not quite the certainty against Obama.

<end clip>

I agree that McCain's a formidable candidate. But I think you're way overstating the electorate's disdain for Hillary, and way overstating the electorate's willingness to vote for a Mormon like Romney and an ardent fundamentalist like Huckabee.

Hillary would crush Romney and Huckabee. I've seen the polling data -- we're talking about minimum 15- to 20-point wins.

McCain would be much more competitive.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Here's the point:

The national DNC has a responsibility to get a winable candidate nomintated as does the RNC.  You are going to see shifting loyalties along the way.  The idea is to get the office.  So what if there are strange bed-fellows, this is politics, that's what happens in politics.

Yes I do see some flawed logic in voting for candidate C to keep votes from candidate A, so that perhaps candidate B will win.

That's pretty much how "candidate B" won the 1992 presidential race.

From where I sit, Huckabee doesn't stand a chance at winning the nomination, but it's his prerogative as to when he decides to drop out.

I believe more and more rank-and-file Republicans are realizing McCain is the best chance to fend off Obama.  Romney or Huckabee could beat Hillary due to pre-existing distaste for the madam.  Not quite the certainty against Obama.

Well, It seems that the polls agree with you.  They are predicting that both Romney and McCain will beat Hillary, but that only McCain will beat Obama.

Not that anyone can really trust pollsters!